| Literature DB >> 15942631 |
S Lorenzen1, J Duyster, C Lersch, S von Delius, M Hennig, R Bredenkamp, C Peschel, F Lordick.
Abstract
Capecitabine and docetaxel have single-agent activity in upper gastrointestinal tumours, and have together demonstrated preclinical synergy and a survival benefit in breast cancer, and high response rates in first-line metastatic gastric cancer. This trial assessed the efficacy, safety and feasibility of capecitabine in combination with docetaxel in patients with metastatic oesophageal cancer. In all, 24 patients with advanced disease (17 squamous cell carcinoma and seven adenocarcinoma) received oral capecitabine (1000 mg m(-2) twice daily on days 1-14) plus intravenous docetaxel (75 mg m(-2) on day 1) every 3 weeks as first- (n = 16) or second-line (n = 8) therapy. Patients received a median of four cycles of treatment (range, 0-6). The median follow-up is 16.5 months (range, 7.9-21.4 months). Intent-to-treat efficacy analysis showed an overall response rate of 46%. Of the 11 responders (one complete and 10 partial), nine of 16 (56%) received first-line and two of eight (25%) received second-line therapy. The median time to progression was 6.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.5-7.7 months). The median survival was 15.8 months (95% CI, 7.8-23.9 months). Severe adverse events (grade 3/4) reported were: neutropenia (42%, including febrile neutropenia 8%), hand-foot syndrome (29%), diarrhoea (13%), sensory neuropathy (13%), anaemia (8%) and fatigue (8%). Capecitabine plus docetaxel has a manageable adverse event profile and very promising activity in metastatic oesophageal cancer, at least comparable to other doublet regimens. Therefore, the combination merits further investigation in this setting.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2005 PMID: 15942631 PMCID: PMC2361804 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602645
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Patient baseline characteristics
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Median | 61.5 | |
| Range | 49–72 | |
|
| ||
| Male | 21 | 88 |
| Female | 3 | 12 |
|
| ||
| 0 | 8 | 33 |
| 1 | 16 | 67 |
|
| ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 7 | 29 |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 17 | 71 |
|
| ||
| Oesophagectomy | 6 | 25 |
| First-line chemotherapy | 8 | 33 |
| Radiotherapy | 3 | 12 |
| Chemoradiotherapy | 9 | 37 |
ECOG=Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.
Antitumour efficacy (ITT analysis, n=24)
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| ORR | 11 | 46 | 26–67 |
| CR | 1 | 4 | 0.1–21 |
| PR | 10 | 42 | 22–63 |
| SD | 4 | 17 | 5–37 |
| Progressive disease | 7 | 29 | 13–51 |
| Not evaluable | 2 | 8 | 1–27 |
ITT=intent-to-treat; CI=confidence interval; ORR=objective response rate; CR=complete response; PR=partial response; SD=stable disease.
Figure 1Kaplan–Meier plot of time to disease progression for all patients treated for metastatic oesophageal cancer.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier plot of overall survival for all patients treated for metastatic oesophageal cancer.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier plot of overall survival according to line of treatment for metastatic oesophageal cancer.
Most common treatment-related adverse events
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Anaemia | 9 | 37 | 2 | 8 |
| Neutropenia | 3 | 12 | 10 | 42 |
| Febrile neutropenia | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 |
| Diarrhoea | 3 | 12 | 3 | 13 |
| Sensory neuropathy | 7 | 29 | 3 | 13 |
| Fatigue | 9 | 37 | 2 | 8 |
| Hand–foot syndrome | 7 | 29 | 7 | 29 |